User talk:LaPort O1

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia! We have compiled some guidance for new healthcare editors:
 * 1) Please keep the mission of Wikipedia in mind. We provide the public with accepted knowledge, working in a community.
 * 2) We do that by finding high quality secondary sources and summarizing what they say, giving WP:WEIGHT as they do.  Please do not try to build content by synthesizing content based on primary sources.  (For the difference between primary and secondary sources, see WP:MEDDEF.)
 * 3) Please use high-quality, recent, secondary sources for medical content (see WP:MEDRS). High-quality sources include review articles (which are not the same as peer-reviewed), position statements from nationally and internationally recognized bodies (like CDC, WHO, FDA), and major medical textbooks. Lower-quality sources are typically removed. Please beware of predatory publishers – check the publishers of articles (especially open source articles) at Beall's list.
 * 4) The ordering of sections typically follows the instructions at WP:MEDMOS. The section above the table of contents is called the WP:LEAD. It summarizes the body. Do not add anything to the lead that is not in the body. Style is covered in MEDMOS as well; we avoid the word "patient" for example.
 * 5) More generally see WP:MEDHOW, which gives great tips for editing about health -- for example, how to format citations quickly and easily.
 * 6) Reference tags generally go after punctuation, not before; there is no preceding space.
 * 7) We use very few capital letters and very little bolding. Only the first word of a heading is usually capitalized.
 * 8) Common terms are not usually wikilinked; nor are years, dates, or names of countries and major cities.
 * 9) Do not use URLs from your university library's internal net: the rest of the world cannot see them.
 * 10) Please include page numbers when referencing a book or long journal article.
 * 11) Please format citations consistently within an article and be sure to cite the PMID for journal articles and ISBN for books; see WP:MEDHOW for how to format citations.
 * 12) Never copy and paste from sources; we run detection software on new edits.
 * 13) Talk to us! Wikipedia works by collaboration at articles and user talkpages.

Once again, welcome, and thank you for joining us! Please share these guidelines with other new editors.

– the WikiProject Medicine team Jytdog (talk) 19:37, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the welcome! Once again, I apologize for the rough opening day. —LaPort O1 LaPort O1 (talk) 01:11, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, please take your time in the future. There is a learning curve. Jytdog (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions
Jytdog (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Promotional editing
Hello, I'm Jytdog. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Zone diet have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 19:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Zone diet. Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Zone diet was changed by LaPort O1 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.970057 on 2018-04-20T19:55:32+00:00.


 * I certainly understand how ClueBot NG would find my edits to be vandalism. When I was under the impression that my edits were not being kept due to a bug in the system, I became frustrated and added a sarcastic line of text that read something like “The Zone Diet is the most natural diet every conceived”. This was intended to be humorous. Obviously it is not humorous to make misleading or unconstructive statements on an informational page like Wikipedia. It seems ClueBot NG does its job very well and Wikipedia should be proud of the program they developed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaPort O1 (talk • contribs) 23:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, don't add WP:POINTY content. If you do that again you will have your editing privileges removed or restricted. Jytdog (talk) 01:50, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Edit warring
Your recent editing history at Zone diet shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 20:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Originally I thought there was a bug in the system that was preventing my edits from remaining permanent. After receiving this notification it is apparent that Jytdog was attempting an edit war as she/he broke the three-revert rule. Upon closer examination of this topic, I found his/her talk page activity from 2 years ago. What is her/his reason for such a prolonged interest in the Zone diet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaPort O1 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I watch a lot of articles about diets, as they are often edited badly by fans or people working for organizations that promote them. Please do use the article talk page when you are reverted, instead of continuing to try to force your edits in. Jytdog (talk) 01:49, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 20:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Paid editing
Hello LaPort O1. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:LaPort O1. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jytdog (talk) 22:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I am not receiving nor do I expect to receive any compensation for my edits on this topic. I have no direct or indirect financial stake in the success of the Zone Diet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaPort O1 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying!  Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this  in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread.  I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.  That is how we know who said what to whom and when.


 * Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).


 * I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 01:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. Your editing reflects what we call "advocacy" - you have consistently removed negative content and added positive content, much of the latter without any sources.  This is how people who work for or on behalf of organizations, and also how "fans" edit.  Either way, it is not OK.   Please do have a read of User:Jytdog/How which explains how Wikipedia works.  I'll reply to other stuff above. Jytdog (talk) 01:46, 21 April 2018 (UTC)